It’s the game plan

[RalphiusMaximus 6,088]

5 hours ago, Mr Steve said:

The game plan is why we got there.

The game plan is Spam. Literally. As in we pepper them with endless poor quality f50 entries and eventually sheer weight of numbers mean we'll score a few. Imagine what would happen if we had that many entries AND an actual plan to convert entries to goals. We'd be unstoppable!

[layzie 34,012]

The game plan is sound. It may need some tinkering here and there but it is solid. I think that in terms of execution of the game plan we are not at full capacity. Maybe about 75-80% of what we can do with it. It can’t happen overnight and we are making progress with it. 

[Biffen 12,947]

Hogan and Lever are going to give us more marking power.

I believe we need some raw pace on the wings.

Also-tackling was poor yesterday as a team.

 

[nosoupforme 3,085]

The game plan is out the door if you don't play your role and execute it. The Game Plan got us to a Preliminary Final.

[titan_uranus 25,044]

Sometimes I feel like Demonland doesn't give opponents enough credit.

Saying we lost yesterday because of our game plan is effectively saying "we'd have won with a better game plan", which completely disrespects West Coast.

We lost yesterday because West Coast were so good that we weren't able to compete with them in critical areas - contested ball and marking. They beat us at the contest and they beat us in the air, and that's pretty much that when it comes to trying to win games of football.

I loved Weideman's first two finals but he was nowhere yesterday, Hogan's reliability for marks on the wing and across half-forward will assist us, as will Lever's ability to break up opposition possession chains (we just couldn't stop them yesterday).

[Rogue 585]

19 hours ago, tiers said:

A game plan built around the sum of the individual abilities of available players is the key to being competitive.

A game plan that can be readily overwhelmed like today is not a good game plan.

The boys tried as hard as they could but were beaten by a better prepared team that had worked out how to stymie our strengths and frustrate our game style. Foot passes went nowhere, handpasses were sloppy and chopped.

I reckon you've just contradicted yourself. On one hand you lay the blame on our game plan, and in the same breath you acknowledge the horrible skill execution.

I'm not an AFL coach, but I'm pretty certain that horrible skill execution is not part of any game plan. We had three gettable shots in the first 10 mins and failed to kick a goal, and I think all of their first quarter goals might have been on the back of turnovers...

NB: Once Lever went down I thought our outside chance of a flag was gone, given that our defence is the weakest third of the ground personnel-wise. However, since the QB game I've been consistently pointing to our lack of polish going forward as the thing holding us back from winning games regardless, and I still reckon that's on the money. Although we struggled with contested ball, if we'd been more polished with the ball then we'd have kept ourselves in the game and had a chance to regroup. We need to continue improving (both improving the players we have and improving the squad) to ensure we consistently maximise our chances.

Edited September 23, 2018 by Rogue

[Deemania since 56 6,718]

18 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

In the first two weeks, particularly vs Geelong when we needed to calm our early finals nerves, it was TMac who was taking those big marks.

Nowhere to be seen today.

Add Hogan to TMac and Weideman next year and we'll have those marking options.

Plus Preuss and May, I'd hope.